Could an alternate Iberian union conquer North Africa?
- Thread starter Prince of Permsia
- Start date
I think they certainly could, at least for a while. OTL, there is Charles V's successful Tunis operation in 1535 which shows the Spanish ability to wage war south of the Mediterranean.
Possible PODs? Butterfly away Henry the Navigator or at least Columbus expedition opening up the Americas. Being as it is, it was way more lucrative in terms of gold AND souls to control the Americas instead of continuing the reconquista beyond Granada and into North Africa.
Assuming the mindset of the days, such campaigns would be bloodbaths (Tunis was) and might be seen as a worse stain on Christian history than the original crusades. It would be hard to imagine a successful integration of these regions into the Spanish domain similar to Granada. Or would ruthlessness and forced conversion turn the African coast between Casablanca and Tunis into a Catholic stronghold?
Possible PODs? Butterfly away Henry the Navigator or at least Columbus expedition opening up the Americas. Being as it is, it was way more lucrative in terms of gold AND souls to control the Americas instead of continuing the reconquista beyond Granada and into North Africa.
Assuming the mindset of the days, such campaigns would be bloodbaths (Tunis was) and might be seen as a worse stain on Christian history than the original crusades. It would be hard to imagine a successful integration of these regions into the Spanish domain similar to Granada. Or would ruthlessness and forced conversion turn the African coast between Casablanca and Tunis into a Catholic stronghold?
Algiers at last was probably attainable, being beyond the effective rang of a major fleet based in Constantinople.
Osman Aga
Banned
Theoretically speaking, the Habsburgs could also have conquered North Africa. But Spain had a reputation of persecuting Muslims, distrusting even Moriscos (converts). Hence why the population was so resistant, not only the refugees from Iberia, and open for limited Ottoman Authority.
Spain really gotta ease up on persecution of Muslims and keep most of North Africa as vassals (or conquer some coastal lands of those who resists to enforce Spanish dominance, like Oran or Rif region) until Spain can move in. Conquest does not happen with just entering. The geography is bad, the climate is bad, the locals are hostile and will resist Spanish rule. That is in OTL.
If Spain eases up the persecution of Muslims they can most definitely own Tunisia and Libya by 1600. The coast of course, the desert is useless and dangerous. Algiers, Tlemcen, Wattasids, Saadis will likely remain vassals until at least the 1700s. Another boost is if the Ottomans prioritizes their naval warfare in the Indian Ocean or are more successful in Persia.
Not to perceive the ottomans a real threat whose support to the Moriscos could mean a new islamic nation in the southeast of the Peninsula.
Getting rid of the Barbary states could lead to that assessment, IRl Spanish fears were fueled by the loss of their footholds in North Africa and raids by the Barbary states.
Osman Aga
Banned
It was even before that. The Ottomans were a threat to the West in 1480 for the first time. Long after Castille's stance on non-Catholics.
Edit: also, the Ottomans threatened Aragonese lands in Italy without Aragon getting rid of it's Muslims so I find the Ottoman Threat in 1490s rather unconvincing. The 1560s would be differents but if the PoD is changed here so will the years beyond that.
Last edited:
Osman Aga
Banned
Maybe Isabella dies at latest in 1498, preferably along with De Cineros who was influential in their anti-islamic rhetoric. Miguel is not as influenced as Isabella to persecute non-Catholics. At least non-Catholics who are not heretics.
Well, in OTL Iberian Kingdoms along of their history went through either periods of persecution and of tolerance of their Muslim subjects depending mostly of each King/Queen will and/or from their religious zeal coupled with their (or from their advisers) political pragmatism.
But specifically, what would be needed, its that the tolerance and protection clauses included on the Capitulaciones de Granada (Granada's treaty) would have had continued to be respected and enforced by TTL Iberian Monarchs.
Given how Spain treated Granada, wouldn’t surprise me if once they solidify control they say “convert or leave” to all the Muslim residents of North Africa.
Granada isn’t North Africa
Obviously the Spanish won’t have either the capacity or ressource to do either of that
Then they are farther away from royal control and might interfere in proselytist efforts towards the natives.
Lusitania
Donor
The attacks on North Africa would need to be two front attack. Attacking the cities and coast along North Africa and cutting off the supply of trade goods from West Africa to weaken then economically while at same time enriching the coffers of Iberian union Countries.
Last edited:
But during centuries there were periods of intolerance that did not mean full expulsion. If the ottomans were not a direct threat, noblemen would be more successful protecting their morisco subjects.
It is possible but I think the best window of opportunity was the early 16th century not the Iberian Union, in fact it's fairly straightforward, just have the Spanish defeat and kill Barbarossa and his brother and have the Ottomans fail to conquer the Mameluks and fail to defeat the Safavids. This already would remove the Ottomans from the Maghreb and make even their expansion in the Greek islands far slower.
The iberian union itself is not needed IMO, it could make a conquest of Morocco itself easier, given that Portugal wouldn't have the burden of having to conquer the bulk of Morocco by itself.
The iberian union itself is not needed IMO, it could make a conquest of Morocco itself easier, given that Portugal wouldn't have the burden of having to conquer the bulk of Morocco by itself.